header-logo header-logo

24 March 2011
Issue: 7458 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Cells not patentable

Totipotent cells, which carry within them the potential to evolve into complete human beings, are human embryos and therefore not patentable, according to an Advocate General’s Opinion.

Totipotent cells, which carry within them the potential to evolve into complete human beings, are human embryos and therefore not patentable, according to an Advocate General’s Opinion.

Neither can a procedure using other embryonic stem cells, known as pluripotent cells, be patented where it first requires the destruction or modification of the embryo, Advocate General Yves Bot said.

Brüstle v Greenpeace eV (C-34/10) concerned a patent held by Mr Brüstle for a stem cell treatment for neural defects, which was being developed to help patients suffering from Parkinson’s disease.

Interpreting Directive 98/44/EC, the “Biotech Directive”, Bot said totipotent cells must be legally classified as embryos since they appeared after fusion of the gametes and therefore had the capacity of developing into fully formed human beings.

While pluripotent cells lacked this capacity, they could not be patentable if they were obtained through the destruction or modification of an embryo.
However, Bot said that uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes could be allowed where these were therapeutic or useful to the human embryo, for example, to correct a malformation and ensure its survival.
 

Issue: 7458 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridgestrengthened by partner hire

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Hampshire firm appoints head of new family department

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Firm strengthens securities practice with partner return

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll